Oh, you’re too kind! I would like to take credit but in reality I was inspired by people like Chris Jeffries, the writer of this Medium article.
His confident writing style and utter lack of sources was truly an inspiration.
Oh, you’re too kind! I would like to take credit but in reality I was inspired by people like Chris Jeffries, the writer of this Medium article.
His confident writing style and utter lack of sources was truly an inspiration.
Sorry I didn’t want to write an essay, but you’re right, I should have provided more.
I think it’s obvious the Medium article is poorly sourced- there are no links, no quotes, and no attribution whatsoever. Compare it to a write up like Hamas Recycling Unexploded Ordinance in Gaza, which tells the exact same story but it comes with links and quotes, and it names the source as Michael Cardash, the former deputy head of the Israeli National Police Bomb Disposal Division.
As for the Iranian connection, I know I’m going against popular opinion, but I made my claims clear and anyone can try to disprove me.
A quick Google search shows many articles on the bomb disposal unit and tactics inside Gaza dating back to at least 2012. The Inevitable Rearmament of Hamas (2021) gives a good analysis. An even better source for this is the al-Qassam Brigade’s youtube, they post raw war footage including bomb disposal. Unfortunately I dont speak Arabic so I wasnt able to find a specific video.
This Medium article is poorly sourced.
The NYT article is from 2021.
The oft-repeated idea that Iran supplies the majority of Hamas weapons is also poorly sourced. It is usually attributed to the CIA’s World Factbook or former US generals who now are talking heads for think tanks. These sources are highly biased.
But one thing that has been well documented is the Hamas unexploded ordinance team. They have over a decade of experience disarming and retrieving Israeli bombs from Gazan homes and businesses.
Brutal US sanctions cut them off from global trade. An over-reliance on oil meant their economy crashed along with oil prices. A seemingly high level of corruption in government. Multiple coup attempts by foreign actors.
The old stance: No ceasefire
The new stance: Yes to a (temporary) ceasefire (only if Hamas capitulates to every Israeli demand) (then after the short ceasefire, Israel can continue the invasion and genocide)
Yes I think we have the same general thesis here, readers should think critically always.
Look at the context here, my unsourced internet comment was in response to xep’s unsourced internet comment.
Xep made 3 claims, and I believe all 3 are incorrect.